Leaving France does not, by itself, wipe latent gains on securities. Exit tax France deferral is the statutory name families should use for that file: article 167 bis of the Code général des impôts, which taxes certain unrealised gains when a taxpayer ceases to be French tax resident, then offers a payment deferral (sursis de paiement) whose terms depend on the destination state. The popular story that “the exit tax was abolished” is false. The popular story that every departure writes a cheque the week of the move is also false.
This article is general information for families and family offices. It is not a tax opinion, a filing, or personalised advice. Whether article 167 bis applies, how the gain is measured, and which deferral is available depend on the facts of the household and on counsel who can read the Code, the BOFiP comments, and the forms in force. This note does not invent a 2026 change to the statutory thresholds. Where a figure or a deadline must be confirmed for a live file, the working copies are impots.gouv.fr and Légifrance.
What exit tax France deferral is (and what it is not)
Article 167 bis is an income-tax rule on latent capital gains, certain earn-out receivables, and some gains whose taxation had already been deferred under older reports, at the moment the taxpayer transfers tax domicile out of France. It is not a wealth tax. It is not IFI. It is not a tax on the family home. Real estate follows other plus-value rules, including the non-resident rules, which are a different chapter. Assurance-vie contracts are not the securities listed in article 150-0 A that 167 bis points to. Mixing those piles is how a departure memo becomes a novel.
The trigger is the transfer of tax domicile, deemed to occur on the day before the taxpayer ceases to be taxable in France on worldwide income (article 167 bis III). Residence itself is tested under article 4 B and the treaties. A household that “moved” in the social sense but still has its foyer in France has not opened 167 bis. A household that has opened 167 bis still needs a residence analysis. The two files share facts. They are not the same form.
The statutory tests: six years, 50%, €800,000
The first limb is a residence history. The taxpayer must have been tax-domiciled in France for at least six of the ten years preceding the transfer. That is the gate in the first sentence of article 167 bis I. A new arrival who leaves after four years is not in this article for the latent-gain charge, whatever a banker may have implied. A long-resident household that spent two of the last ten years abroad can still be in.
The second limb is the securities test, and it is alternative, not cumulative. At the date of transfer, the rights, securities, or titles mentioned in article 150-0 A I 1, held directly or indirectly by members of the tax household, either represent at least 50% of the profits of a company, or have a global value exceeding €800,000, determined under the valuation rules the article cites. The official wording sits in article 167 bis CGI on Légifrance. This article does not replace those figures with a “2026 round number.” If a later finance act has amended the amounts after the version you are reading, the Légifrance consolidation and the impots.gouv.fr forms are the check, not a conference slide.
Earn-out receivables (complément de prix) are in the charge on a related test: six years of French domicile in the last ten, without repeating the €800,000 alternative in that sentence. Gains already in report under specified older articles, including 150-0 B ter in particular, are brought into charge at departure as well (167 bis II). Families who completed an asset-for-share contribution and thought the report would travel silently are often in that second pile.
Valuation of the latent gain is the difference between the value at departure, determined under the rules the article cross-refers (including article 758 and the last paragraph of article 973 I), and the acquisition price, or the value used for transfer duties if the title came by gift or inheritance. Holding-period allowances that still exist for some pre-2018 titles can reduce the gain (150-0 D 1 ter and 1 quater), with the transfer treated as a disposal for that purpose. Latent losses on the same measurement are not offsettable against these latent gains or against other gains (167 bis I 5).
How the tax is computed: article 200 A, not a special “exit rate”
Article 167 bis II bis sends the income tax on these gains and receivables to article 200 A: the default flat rate in 200 A 1, or, if the taxpayer is taxed under 200 A 2, a differential computation against the progressive scale. Gains that were in 150-0 B ter report follow 200 A 2 ter. Social levies sit beside income tax; they are not “included in 167 bis” by folklore. Families should not paste a single percentage into a departure model and call it done. The PFU architecture, including the social overlay in force for the year of departure, belongs in the same model as the IFI inventory belongs in a real-estate file: separate statute, same household.
Immediate payment is the legal default if no deferral applies. Deferral changes cash, guarantees, and reporting, not the existence of the tax.
Automatic sursis: EU, EEA partners, and recovery assistance
Article 167 bis IV provides an automatic stay of payment when the taxpayer transfers tax domicile to a Member State of the European Union, or to another state or territory that has concluded with France both an administrative-assistance convention against fraud and evasion and a mutual recovery-assistance convention of similar scope to Council Directive 2010/24/EU, and that is not a non-cooperative state or territory within article 238-0 A. That is the statutory sentence. It is not “anywhere in Europe,” and it is not “any treaty country.” Switzerland, for example, is not an EU Member State; whether a given destination fits the two-convention test is a counsel question against the list in force, not a dinner-table classification.
Automatic sursis does not mean the gain is forgotten. The tax is established. Payment is deferred. The taxpayer must still declare the latent gains, earn-outs, and reported gains on the departure return. Service-public lists the working forms: form 2074-ETD (Cerfa 14894) for the transfer year, and form 2074-ETSL (Cerfa 15901) for light follow-up in later years when nothing has happened to end the stay or create a rebate. The non-resident personal-tax service in Noisy-le-Grand is the addressee the administration publishes. Failure to file the declaration or the follow-up form makes the deferred tax immediately due (167 bis IX 4). That is the surveillance. It is paperwork with a cash consequence, not a friendly newsletter.
Guarantees when the destination is outside article IV
Article 167 bis V allows a stay on express request when the destination is not an article IV state, or when the taxpayer later leaves an article IV state for a third state. Three conditions then stack: declare the amounts, designate a representative established in France authorised to receive communications on assessment, collection, and disputes, and constitute guarantees with the public accountant before departure, sufficient to secure the Treasury’s claim.
The amount of the guarantee, before departure, is 12.8% of the gross latent gains and receivables, without the holding-period allowances that may reduce the eventual income-tax base. Gains in 150-0 B ter follow their own rate for this calculation. After the tax notice is issued, a top-up (or a partial release) aligns the guarantee with the tax actually computed under II bis. Families who treat “a letter to the inspector” as a guarantee will not obtain the stay. Bank sureties, mortgages, and other security the accountant accepts are the operational tools. Their annual cost is a banking price, not a tax rate, and this article does not invent one.
What ends the stay, and what cancels the tax
The stay expires when a listed event occurs (167 bis VII 1): sale, redemption, reimbursement, or cancellation of the titles (with specified exceptions for certain exchanges and contributions); some gifts, especially if the donor is not in an article IV state and cannot show that tax avoidance was not the principal motive; death, for certain older reported gains; receipt of an earn-out, or contribution, sale, or gift of the earn-out receivable in specified cases; and, for 150-0 B ter, disposal of the received titles. Each sub-paragraph is narrower than the family story of “if we sell, we pay.” Read the sub-paragraph that matches the event.
A different clock can cancel the tax on the latent gains of I without a sale. After two years from departure, or on an earlier return to French tax domicile, the tax on those latent gains is remitted of right, or repaid if it was paid immediately, if the titles (or titles received in a qualifying 150-0 B exchange) are still in the taxpayer’s estate. The clock becomes five years if the global value defined in I 1 exceeded €2.57 million at departure. Death, and certain gifts, can also remit. Return to France with the titles still held restores, for some reported gains, the situation as if the taxpayer had never left (VII 3). These are statutory remissions. They are not a negotiation. They are also not a reason to sit in a third country for four years and eleven months without filing ETSL.
If, when a sale occurs, the actual gain is smaller than the latent gain computed at departure, the tax is recast downward (VIII). If there is a loss, the tax on that line is remitted. Foreign tax paid in the new residence on the same event can be credited within limits, first against social levies then against income tax. Families who pay twice because nobody kept the French file current are not discovering a new rule. They are discovering article VIII 5 after the fact.
Mechanics a family office should inventory
List every title in 150-0 A I 1, in the household, including holdings and foreign companies, with acquisition dates and prices. Flag 50% profit rights. Compute a defensible global value at the contemplated departure date; €800,000 is a statutory test, not a rounding. Flag 150-0 B ter reports and earn-outs. Map the destination against article IV: EU member, two-convention third state, or neither. If neither, start the guarantee and representative file before departure; the Code’s timing is “prior to departure” for the V guarantees, plus the two-month address notice in IX 5.
Then build a cash calendar: tax if the stay ends by sale, remission if the two-year or five-year clock completes with titles still held, guarantee top-up after the notice, annual ETSL if nothing happened. The French ATAD interest rule in the ATAD 2026 holding note is a corporate deduction ceiling. Exit tax is a personal charge on latent gains. Both can sit in the same departure year.
Vellum keeps that inventory inside a fee-only process so that a bank’s “we will open the account in month two” does not outrun the 2074-ETD. How the work is organised sits on the Vellum Finance services map. BOFiP remains the doctrine layer on bofip.impots.gouv.fr once the article is in view.
Conclusion
Exit tax in France is still article 167 bis: latent gains on specified securities when a six-of-ten-year resident leaves, if the 50% or €800,000 test is met, plus earn-outs and certain reported gains. Automatic deferral exists for article IV destinations; requested deferral with a French representative and 12.8% guarantees exists for others. Surveillance is the ETD and ETSL forms. Remission after two or five years, or on return, death, or qualifying gift, is statutory. Families who read Légifrance and file will treat the tax as a managed clock. Those who invent a 2026 threshold will meet it as a cash demand.
Discretion. Stability. Prosperity.
Team Vellum
A team of passionate professionals who combine their expertise to bring knowledge through Vellum Finance & Patrimoine blog articles. Each member writes about their own field of expertise, cross referencing with our colleagues own fields to ensure the highest quality of information possible in all our content.
